Chromebooks in School and Your Child: Why the Rollout without Considering the Health Risk

[Anonymous]

A Friends child goes to a private school where all the kids get Chromebooks. She takes the chrome book every night to do her homework. She measured it with the radiation meter when it was on wireless and they made a video.

We very easily plugged it in to the ethernet line that ran into the modem and stopped the radiation. Schools always keep the Chromebooks on wifi.
Watch this excellent video about Montgomery County Chromebooks, Bells Mil Elementary and Churchill High School.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyiKMsHGs8g

Why has MCPS rolled out these devices without considering the safest way to use them?
Did you know some parents are having their children plug the devices in to reduce the radiation? They are also having their children moved out from under the access points to a chair further across the room.

[Anonymous]

OP, I've also heard that some parents make their children sit inside all day, for fear that an asteroid is going to hit them if they go out. I'm not sure what they'd do if the asteroid hit the house instead, however.

[Anonymous]

We will all die of wifi cancer.

[Anonymous]

There is a great petition with over 200 signatures calling for MCPS to explore ways to minimize radiation to the kids. See it on their website .
FYI- Doctors who called out Agent Orange in the 80's are calling out wireless as a toxic agent.

Plus Hollywood is doing a movie!

[Anonymous]

Thanks for posting OP.

[Anonymous]

How many of these things are in Churchill HS?

[Anonymous]

Dozens on each floor according to MCPS. They have maps with all the access points and the locations.

[Anonymous]

As a research scientist, I can tell you that there simply isn't enough long-term research on the subject to determine if these radiations at such doses and over a long period of time, are dangerous to children. Studies like this take decades, since you have to follow a cohort of exposed and non-exposed kids over a period of their life, and costs a fortune.

The safest measure would be to use these devices only when absolutely necessary, which for me means use of technology only in middle school and up. Despite having a child with special needs for whom use of tech is a guaranteed accommodation on his IEP, I am against a general use of technology in elementary schools. Kids have to learn to write better, before being sent off with laptops. There is interesting research out there about the significant differences in memorization and learning when handwriting versus typing: handwriting wins, and cursive wins over block printing.

[Anonymous]

Actually long term research is not needed.
The early warning signs are in if you look at the experimental studies.
It kills brain cells in mice and damages DNA through an indirect route.

The whole thing is ridiculous as schools should invest in better teachers and smaller classes. Instead they are cutting music teachers, and buyingh hese Chromebooks.
I hear the kids hate them because they are cluncky.. but they do like to play GAMES on them !!!!!

Apparently there is a lot of that going on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Actually long term research is not needed.
The early warning signs are in if you look at the experimental studies.
It kills brain cells in mice and damages DNA through an indirect route.

The whole thing is ridiculous as schools should invest in better teachers and smaller classes. Instead they are cutting music teachers, and buyingh hese Chromebooks.
I hear the kids hate them because they are cluncky.. but they do like to play GAMES on them !!!!!

Apparently there is a lot of that going on.

21:13 here. I understand that some short term studies may appear terrifying, but long-term studies on actual human populations with realistic doses are always needed. The studies which have come out are a reason to put pressure on school systems, I'm all for that! But in reality they aren't proof positive that humans would be affected in the same way and to the same extent.

[Anonymous]

yes but why would we expose the kids first.
Proper testing should be done FIRST. Then you expose the kids. This just makes sense to me.

The research is terrifying and perhaps we should trust our gut and choose a technology that has no such research studies calling safety into question.

for example...
Dasdag S. et al 2015. Effects of 2.4 GHz radiofrequency radiation emitted from Wi-Fi equipment on microRNA expression in brain tissue. Int J Radiat Biol. 91(7): 555-561. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25775055

· MicroRNAs (miRNA) play a paramount role in growth, differentiation, proliferation and cell death by suppressing one or more target genes. However, their interaction with radiofrequencies is still unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term effects of radiofrequency radiation emitted from a Wireless Fidelity (Wi-Fi) system on some of the miRNA in brain tissue.
· RESULTS: The results revealed that long-term exposure of 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi radiation can alter expression of some of the miRNAs .
· CONCLUSION: Long-term exposure of 2.4 GHz RF may lead to adverse effects such as neurodegenerative diseases originated from the alteration of some miRNA expression and more studies should be devoted to the effects of RF radiation on miRNA expression levels.

[Anonymous]

We do not need proof to just err on the side of safety.

[Anonymous]

plus kids are being told to do projects and THEY CANNOT EVEN TYPE!
shouldn't we teach them to type first?

Why give kid this in first grade? Why not wait until they can type.. it makes no sense developmentally.

[Anonymous]

lots of info on the parent blog at safetechforschoolsmaryland.blogspot.com

[Anonymous]

Let's see my phone, laptop, iPad, and tv all have wireless and there are all kinds of signals bouncing around my house all day and my kids have been living in my house for 10 years, so really I am not the least bit concerned about the hour they spend on a Chromebook at school.